Apartment and Condo Rentals: Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence

4/27/2021 G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
lee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVAR…
apartment and condo rentals

Browse results for New House For Rent
buyandsellph.com OPEN
Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence
April 2018 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court

Jurisprudence
Search
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2018 > April 2018 Decisions > G.R.
No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
ChanRobles Professional
MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVAREZ Y LONQUIAS AND RAMIL DAL Y
Review, Inc.
MOLIANEDA, Accused-Appellants.:
G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVAREZ Y LONQUIAS AND RAMIL DAL Y
MOLIANEDA, Accused-Appellants.
ChanRobles On-Line Bar

Review
THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y

FLORES, ALVIN ALVAREZ Y LONQUIAS AND RAMIL DAL Y MOLIANEDA,
Accused-Appellants.
DECISION
GESMUNDO, J.:
This is an appeal from the May 19, 2017 Decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in
CA-G.R. CR No. 07568 which affirmed the March 1, 2015 Decision2 of the Regional
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2018aprildecisions.php?id=321 1/19
4/27/2021 G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVAR…
Trial Court (RTC) of Parañaque City, finding accused-appellant Malou F. Alvarado

(Malou) guilty beyond reasonable doubt for violating Sections 5 and 11, Article II of
Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9165, while Alvin L. Alvarez (Alvin) and Ramil M. Dal (Ramil)
[collectively referred to as appellants] were found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
violating Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165.
The Antecedents
In Criminal Case No. 11-0124, Malou was charged with Violation of Section 11, Article
II of R.A. No. 9165. The accusatory portion of the Information states:
That on or about the 26th day of January 2011, in the City of Parañaque,
Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-
named accused, not being authorized by law, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously have in her possession and under her control
ChanRobles CPA Review and custody four (4) pieces of small heat-sealed transparent plastic
Online sachets containing white crystalline substance weighing 0.01 gram each
or a total of0.04 gram, marked as "RB-1" to "RB-4", which when tested
was found to be positive for Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride, a
dangerous drug.3
In a separate Information, docketed Criminal Case No. 11-0125, Malou, Alvin and
Ramil were charged with Violation of Section 5, Article II of R.A. No. 9165, the
accusatory portion of which states:
That on or about the 26th day of January 2011, in the City of Parañaque,
Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-
named accused, conspiring and confederating together and all of them
mutually helping and aiding one another, not being lawfully authorized by
law, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously sell, trade,
administer, dispense, deliver, give away to another, distribute, dispatch in
ChanRobles Special Lecture transit or transport one (1) heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet
Series containing white crystalline substance weighing 0.01 gram, marked as
"RB", to Police Poseur PO2 ROLLY BURGOS, which content of the said
plastic sachet when tested was found to be positive for
Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride, a dangerous drug.4
In another Information, docketed as Criminal Case No. 11-0123, Beata E. Lonquias

(Beata) was also charged with violation of Section 12, Article II of R.A. No. 9165 or
illegal possession of drug paraphernalia.
When arraigned, appellants pleaded not guilty. Trial ensued.
From the evidence presented at the trial court, the CA summarized the respective
versions of the parties, as follows:
Version of the Prosecution
The prosecution presented Forensic Chemist Police Inspector Richard

Mangalip (P/Insp. Mangalip), PO3 Eric Sarino, PO2 Rolly Burgos, and PO3
Edwin Plopinio and from their testimonies, the following events were
gathered:
On 26 January 2011, around 2:00 o'clock in the afternoon, an Informant

reported to the Parañaque City Police Station Anti-Illegal Drug Special
Operations Task Group (SAIDSOTG) about the illegal drug activity of
certain [Betsy] and Malou at Sampaloc Site, Barangay BF Homes,
Parañaque City. The police immediately formed a team, headed by Senior
Inspector Roque Tome (P/Sr. Insp.Tome), to conduct a buy-bust operation
against the suspects, with PO2 Rolly Burgos (PO2 Burgos) as poseur buyer
and PO3 Eric Sarino (PO3 Sarino), and PO3 (Edwin] Plopinio as back-up.
The Team Leader provided PO2 Burgos with [buy]-bust money consisting
of 5 pieces of P100.00 bills, which were marked with "RB" on the upper
left portion of the bills. After coordinating with the Philippine Drug
Advertisement Enforcement Agency (PDEA), the team, together with the Informant,
proceeded to Sampaloc Site, Barangay BF Homes, Parañaque City to
conduct a buy-bust operation. Upon reaching the target area, PO3 Sarino
and PO3 Plopinio strategically positioned themselves as perimeter back-up
officers while PO2 Burgos and the Informant went ahead and when they
reached Chico Street, the Informant and PO2 Burgos spotted two men and
a woman in blue blouse standing at the side of the street. The Informant
identified the woman in blue blouse as Malou Alvarado, their target, while
the two men were identified as Alvin Alvarez (the live-in partner of Malou)
and Ramil Dan (Ramil), their runner. Ramil approached them and offered
them shabu from Malou, who he boasted had ample supply (of drugs).
PO2 Burgos handed the five P100.00 bills to Ramil to buy P500.00 worth
of shabu. Ramil gave the money to Alvin and then approached Malou, who
handed him a small plastic sachet, containing white crystalline substance
suspected to be shabu, which he (Ramil) handed to PO2 Burgos, who
immediately executed the pre arranged signal of throwing his cigarette to
alert the rest of the team that the transaction was consummated. PO2
Burgos introduced himself as a police officer and then arrested Ramil and
Malou, from whom he confiscated a canister containing four (4) sachets of
suspected shabu. Meanwhile, Alvin immediately ran away but PO3 Plopinio
chased and apprehended him inside the house of Beata Lonquias alias
Betty (the subject of the buy-bust operation and later identified as Alvin's
mother). PO3 Plopinio recovered the buy-bust money from Alvin. Beata
likewise ran and was chased and apprehended by PO3 Sarino, who
Advertisement confiscated from her a small plastic container containing numerous
aluminum foil strips, which he did not bother to count. P/Sr. Insp. Tome
contacted the barangay authorities and thus, in the presence of Barangay
Kagawad Noel Azarcon and the four suspects, PO2 Burgos placed
markings on the seized items at the scene of the arrest - RB on the plastic
sachet subject of the sale, RB-5 on the white canister and RB-1 to RB-4
on the [four] 4 sachets inside said canister. Meanwhile, PO3 Sarino
marked the plastic container of aluminum foils with ES and placed his
initials thereon. While SPO2 Burgos was preparing the inventory of the
seized item, PO2 Julaton took photographs of the arrested suspects and
the seized items. Thereafter, the team brought the accused-appellants to
the police station for documentation and to submit the confiscated items
to the PNP Crime Laboratory for examination.
After a request for laboratory examination was made by PO2 Julaton, PO2
Burgos personally brought the confiscated specimens to the PNP Crime
Laboratory for examination. Forensic Chemist P/Insp. Richard Mangalip
found the sachets (in the possession of Malou) and the sachets subject of
the sale positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu. However,
the aluminum foils inside the plastic canister seized from Beata E.
Lonquias alias Betty were found negative of shabu.5
Version of the Accused
Malou Alvarado and her common-law husband Alvin Alvarez were at their
house at Chico Street, Sampaloc Site, Sucat, Parañaque City at around 3
o'clock in the afternoon of 26 January 2011. Alvin was watching television
when PO2 Burgos kicked open their door and together with Police Officers
April-2018 Jurisprudence
Sarino and Plopinio entered and searched their house without any warrant
and without their consent. PO2 Burgos poked a gun at Alvin and though
the police found nothing, they proceeded to handcuff the accused-
A.C. No. 9676, April 02, 2018
appellants and brought them outside. While outside, Malou saw her
- IN RE: DECISION DATED
mother-in-law Beata and a man (Ramil) she did not know, who was also
SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 IN OMB-M-
handcuffed. Then they saw PO2 Burgos brought out from a black bag
A-10-023-A, ETC. AGAINST ATTY. small plastic sachets and money. Subsequently, their pictures were taken
ROBELITO* B. DIUYAN and they were forced to board a police mobile that brought them to Manila
Memorial Park. The police officers then told them to alight from the
G.R. No. 215305, April 03, vehicle and demanded P30,000.00 from each of them to settle their case.
2018 - MARCELO G. SALUDAY, When they told them that they had no money, the police officers brought
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE them to the police station. At the police station, they were ordered to call
PHILIPPINES, Respondent. their relatives so that they could bring the money. When they were
brought for inquest, they admitted that they did not tell the prosecutor
A.M. No. MTJ-18-1911 that the police were extorting money from them. They claimed that they
(formerly A.M. No. 17-08-98- did not file any case against the police officers who apprehended them
MTC), April 16, 2018 - OFFICE OF because they had no money.
THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR,
Ramil, who testified on 18 December 2014, declared that he was on his
Complainant, v. WALTER
way to a friend's house at Sampaloc Site, for possible employment in a
INOCENCIO V. ARREZA, JUDGE,
construction project, when he met six men (who turned out to be police
MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT,
officers), one of whom (PO3 Plopinio) poked a gun at him and told him to
PITOGO, QUEZON, Respondent.
face the wall. When he did not follow, he was hit on the stomach and
handcuffed. Thereafter, he saw a man (Alvin), a woman (Malou) and an
G.R. No. 218703, April 23,
elderly woman (whom he later identified as Beata) coming from an alley.
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE
Then the four of them were gathered together and they were made to
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
sign a document. He saw a police officer handed to PO2 Burgos several
ANTONIO LLAMERA Y ATIENZA,
plastic sachets and five P100.00 bills from his small bag. Thereafter, they
Accused-Appellant.
were photographed, accused of selling illegal drugs and made to board a
vehicle. They were brought to Manila Memorial Park, where policemen
G.R. No. 230751, April 25,
asked them to produce P30,000.00 each but they were not able to give
2018 - ESTRELLITA TADEO-
them any money. Consequently, the police brought them to the police
MATIAS, Petitioner, v. REPUBLIC
station, where they were detained.
OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent. Beata testified that: on 26 January 2011, she was alone in her house
when several men forcibly entered their house, searched it and then
G.R. No. 212866, April 23, arrested her; the police did not have any warrant with them and she did
2018 - SPOUSES FREDESWINDA not know why they arrested and detained her; Malou was just a
DRILON YBIOSA AND ALFREDO
neighbor.6
YBIOSA, Petitioners, v.
INOCENCIO DRILON, Ruling of the RTC
Respondent.
On March 1, 2015, the RTC rendered its decision finding appellants guilty as charged.
It, however, acquitted Beata based on reasonable doubt.
G.R. No. 215387, April 23,
2018 - NORTHERN MINDANAO The RTC held that all the elements of the crimes of illegal possession and illegal sale
INDUSTRIAL PORT AND of shabu were clearly established by the prosecution. It gave credence to the
SERVICES CORPORATION, testimonies of police officers who composed the buy-bust team, particularly PO2
Petitioner, v. ILIGAN CEMENT Burgos who testified on the conduct of the buy-bust operation that resulted in the
CORPORATION, Respondent. arrest of the appellants. As to the failure of the arresting officers to strictly comply
with the requirements under Section 21 of R.A. 9165, it was noted that a barangay
G.R. No. 221029, April 24, kagawad was present during the inventory and hence there was substantial
2018 - REPUBLIC OF THE compliance with the law and that the integrity of the drugs seized from appellants
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. was preserved.
MARELYN TANEDO MANALO,
On the other hand, the defenses of denial and frame-up failed to convince the RTC,
Respondent.
which noted that none of the appellants filed a complaint against the police officers
who allegedly arrested them on false charges and even tried extorting money from
G.R. No. 218255, April 11,
them.
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. However, the RTC ruled that the prosecution failed to establish its case against
JERRY BUGNA Y BRITANICO, accused Beata who was not involved or present during the conduct of the buy-bust.
Accused-Appellants. Also, none of the 114 aluminum foils allegedly found in her possession was marked
by PO3 Sarino who searched her person after he spotted her leaving the house of
G.R. No. 203435, April 11, Malou.
The dispositive portion of the RTC Decision reads:
MARDY AQUINO, MARIO AQUINO, WHEREFORE, premises considered the court renders judgement as
RECTO AQUINO, INYONG follows:
NARVANTE, ROMY FERNANDEZ,
1. In Criminal Case No. 11-0123 for Violation of Sec. 12, Art. II, RA 9165,
FELIX SAPLAN, BONIFACIO
the court finds accused BEATA ESCUADRA LONQUIAS is hereby
CAGUIOA AND JUANITO AQUINO,
ACQUITTED on ground of reasonable doubt;
Accused.; MARDY MARIO
AQUINO, Accused-Appellants. 2. In Criminal Case No. 11-0124 for Violation of Sec. 11, Art. II, RA 9165,
the court finds accused MALOU FLORES ALVARADO, GUILTY beyond
G.R. No. 219957, April 04, reasonable doubt and is hereby sentenced to Imprisonment of twelve (12)
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE years and one (1) day as minimum to seventeen (17) years and four (4)
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. months as maximum and to pay a fine of Php 300,000.00 and;
ELEUTERIO URMAZA Y TORRES,
3. In Criminal Case No. 11-0125 for Violation of Sec. 5, Art. II, RA 9165,
Accused-Appellants.
the Court finds accused MALOU FLORES ALVARADO, ALVIN LONQUIAS
ALVAREZ and RAMIL MOLIANEDA DAL, GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt
G.R. No. 213225, April 04,
and are hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment and to
pay a fine of Php 500,000.00 each;
RENANTE COMPRADO FBRONOLA, It appearing that the accused MALOU FLORES ALVARADO, ALVIN
Accused-Appellant. LONQUIAS ALVAREZ and RAMIL MOLIANEDA DAL are detained at the
Parañaque City Jail and considering the penalty imposed, the OIC Branch
G.R. No. 210446, April 18, Clerk of Court is directed to prepare the Mittimus for the immediate
2018 - ANGELICA G. CRUZ, ANNA transfer of accused ALVIN LONQUIAS ALVAREZ and RAMIL MOLIANEDA
MARIE KUDO, ALBERT G. CRUZ DAL from the Parañaque City Jail to the New Bilibid Prisons, Muntinlupa
AND ARTURO G. CRUZ, City and the transfer of accused MALOU FLORES ALVARADO from the
Petitioners, v. MARYLOU Paranaque City Jail to the Women's Correctional Facility in Mandaluyong
TOLENTINO AND THE OFFICE OF City.
THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF
MANDALUYONG CITY, The bail bond posted by accused BEATA ESCUADRA LONQUIAS is hereby
Respondents. cancelled.
The specimens consisting of five (5) sachets of shabu marked "RB" to

G.R. No. 200075, April 04,
"RB-4" each weighing 0.01 gram for a total of 0.05 gram, as well as the
2018 - SALIC MAPANDI Y
one hundred fourteen (114) pieces of aluminum foil strips placed inside a
DIMAAMPAO, Petitioner, v.
plastic container marked as "ES", are forfeited in favor of the government
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
and the OIC-Branch Clerk of Court is likewise directed to immediately turn
Respondent.
over the same to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) for
proper disposal pursuant to Sec. 21 of RA 9165 and Supreme Court OCA
G.R. No. 216714, April 04,
Circular No. 51-2003.
2018 - SPOUSES GODFREY AND
MA. TERESA TEVES, Petitioners, SO ORDERED.7
v. INTEGRATED CREDIT &
Ruling of the CA
CORPORATE SERVICES, CO.
(NOW CAROL AQUI), Respondent. On appeal, the CA affirmed the decision of the RTC. It held that based on the totality
of the evidence, the prosecution was able to prove that the illegal sale of shabu took
G.R. No. 217805, April 02, place, and that Malou then had in her possession shabu contained in four (4) heat-
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE sealed transparent plastic sachets. The appellate court likewise concluded that there
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. was compliance with the chain of custody rule which clearly showed that the drug
ALSARIF BINTAIB Y FLORENCIO specimens presented in court were the same items in the possession of Malou at the
A.K.A. "LENG," Accused- time of the buy-bust operation. On the other hand, appellants failed to show that the
Appellant. shabu seized from Malou, were tampered with, or switched before they were
delivered to the PNP Crime Laboratory for examination.
G.R. No. 189590, April 23,
2018 - REPUBLIC OF THE The appellate court observed that the appellants "repeatedly harped on the absence
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. HON. of [sic] the accused, media and DOJ representatives during the inventory of the
SANDIGANBAYAN, ROMEO G. seized items." Citing People v. Salvador,8 the CA ruled that failure to strictly comply
PANGANIBAN, FE L. with Section 21 of R.A. 9165 was not fatal.
PANGANIBAN, GERALDINE L.
As to appellants' defense of denial, the CA said that aside from being self-serving, the
PANGANIBAN, ELSA P. DE LUNA
same was unsupported and unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence. Even
their testimonies regarding the incident were found conflicting.
AND PURITA P. SARMIENTO, Dissatisfied with the affirmance of the decision, the appellants filed this appeal before
Respondents. the Court.
In compliance with the Court's Resolution,9 the Public Attorney's Office (PAO), on
G.R. No. 219240, April 04,
behalf of the appellants, filed a manifestation stating that they are adopting and re-
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. pleading all the arguments raised in their appeal brief filed with the CA. A similar
manifestation was filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).
BRYAN GANABA Y NAM-AY,
Accused-Appellant.
Arguments of the Parties
G.R. No. 211273, April 18, In their appeal brief, appellants assail the CA in upholding their conviction despite the
2018 - RAYMOND A. SON, police officers' non-compliance with procedural safeguards prescribed by Section 21
RAYMOND S. ANTIOLA, AND of R.A. No. 9165. They assert that no evidence was presented showing that the
WILFREDO E. POLLARCO, inventory and photographing of the seized items were conducted in their presence
Petitioners, v. UNIVERSITY OF and/or their representative, and representatives from the media and the DOJ. No
SANTO TOMAS, FR. ROLANDO justifiable ground could be found in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses that
DELA ROSA, DR. CLARITA would excuse non compliance with the said provision.
CARILLO, DR. CYNTHIA LOZA, FR.

Appellants further contend that such failure of the arresting officers to show that they
EDGARDO ALAURIN, AND THE
followed the required procedure in the chain of custody constitutes a deviation that
COLLEGE OF FINE ARTS AND
destroys the presumption of regularity in the performance of duty. And although the
DESIGN FACULTY COUNCIL,
defense of denial is weak, appellants assert that they should nonetheless, be
Respondents.
acquitted. They stress that the presumption of innocence stands as a fundamental
principle of both constitutional and criminal law, imposing a rule on evidence, a
G.R. Nos. 192595-96, April 11,
degree of proof that demands no less than total compliance.10
2018 - NATIONAL
ELECTRIFICATION On the other hand, the OSG, as Peoples' counsel, maintains that appellants' guilt in
ADMINISTRATION (NEA), the crimes they were convicted was proven beyond reasonable doubt. All the
Petitioner, v. MAGUINDANAO elements for both crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of shabu have been
ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., sufficiently proven by the evidence presented. The drugs subject of the buy-bust sale
REPRESENTED BY MAGUINDANAO and those seized from the possession of Malou were the same drugs presented and
ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE-PALMA identified in the trial court. Contrary to appellants' assertion, there was substantial
AREA (MAGELCO-PALMA), compliance with Section 21 (a) of R.A. No. 9165 and the chain of custody, as well as
REPRESENTED BY ATTY. LITTIE the presentation of the corpus delicti in court, had likewise been sufficiently
SARAH A. AGDEPPA, ANTONIO U. established.
ACUB, EDGAR L. LA VEGA, RET.
As to the alleged absence of appellants when the inventory was being conducted by
JUDGE TERESITA CARREON
the arresting officers, this issue was not raised before the trial court during the
LLABAN, EMILY LLABAN,
stipulations made by the parties regarding Bgy. Kgd. Azarcon's testimony. As shown
ARMANDO C. LLABAN, AUDIE D.
by the transcript of stenographic notes, appellants admitted that the barangay
MACASARTE, WILFREDO Q.
kagawad was present during the inventory and apart from stipulating on Azarcon's
LLABAN, EVANGELINE A.
lack of personal knowledge on the source of the specimen and the circumstances
VARILLA, CORAZON TUMANG,
surrounding the arrest of the appellants, the latter did not stipulate nor make it of
AND PRESCILLA LANO,
record that when the barangay kagawad was there to witness the inventory,
Respondents.; G.R. Nos. 192676-
appellants were not around at the time.
77, April 11, 2018 - COTABATO
ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. The OSG underscores the previous rulings of this Court that non compliance by the
(COTELCO), REPRESENTED BY apprehending/buy-bust team with Section 21 is not fatal for as long as there is
ALEJANDRO Q. COLLADOS AS justifiable ground therefor, and as long as the integrity and the evidentiary value of
GENERAL MANAGER, Petitioner, v. the confiscated/seized items, are properly preserved. In particular, the absence of the
MAGUINDANAO ELECTRIC representative from DOJ and media was already explained by the arresting officers.
COOPERATIVE-PALMA AREA Thus, if despite their efforts it was only Bgy. Kgd. Azarcon who arrived at the scene
(MAGELCO-PALMA), to witness the photographing and inventory, this predicament is obviously beyond the
REPRESENTED BY ATTY. LITTIE control of the arresting team who had no choice but to proceed with the tasks at
SARAH A. AGDEPPA, ANTONIO U. hand. What is essential was that the police officer had done all they could to
ACUB, EDGAR L. LA VEGA, RET. safeguard the integrity and evidentiary value of the items involved.
JUDGE TERESITA CARREON
LLABAN EVANGELINE A. VARILLA, On appellants' defense of denial, the OSG argues that such denial cannot overcome
AND CORAZON TUMANG; AND the positive assertions of the members of the buy-bust team. The well-entrenched
MAGUINDANAO ELECTRIC principle is that, over and above the accused's denial, greater weight is given to the
COOPERATIVE, INC., positive testimonies of the prosecution witnesses especially when these corroborate
each other on material points, particularly the positive identification of the appellants
REPRESENTED BY ITS as the ones who sold and delivered the shabu to the poseur-buyer and that on the
PRESIDENT, DATU occasion of their arrest, more plastic sachets of shabu were recovered from one of
TUMAGANTANG ZAINAL, them.11
Respondents.
Issue
G.R. No. 232892, April 04,

Whether or not the CA erred in affirming appellants' conviction for illegal sale and
2018 - ALFREDO MALLARI
illegal possession of shabu.
MAGAT, Petitioner, v.
INTERORIENT MARITIME The Court's Ruling
ENTERPRISES, INC.,
The appeal is meritorious.
INTERORIENT MARITIME
ENTERPRISE LIBERIA FOR To secure a conviction for illegal sale of shabu, the following essential elements must
DROMON E.N.E. AND JASMIN P. be established: (a) the identities of the buyer and the seller, the object of the sale,
ARBOLEDA, Respondent. and the consideration; and (b) the delivery of the thing so] d and the payment for
the thing. What is material in prosecutions for illegal sale of shabu is the proof that
G.R. No. 208284, April 23, the transaction or sale actually took place, coupled with the presentation in court of
2018 - THE IGLESIA DE the corpus delicti as evidence.12
JESUCRISTO JERUSALEM NUEVA
In this case, the prosecution narrated that PO2 Burgos, the poseur buyer,
OF MANILA, PHILIPPINES, INC.,
accompanied by their informant, and the rest of the buy-bust team, went to the area
REPRESENTED BY ITS
where Malou and Betty (Beata) supposedly engaged in selling shabu. It was Ramil
PRESIDENT, FRANCISCO GALVEZ,
who approached PO2 Burgos and offered him shabu, and when PO2 Burgos gave the
Petitioner, v. LOIDA DELA CRUZ
payment (in marked money) for P500.00 worth of shabu, Ramil handed the money to
USING THE NAME CHURCH OF
Alvin. Malou then gave Ramil one plastic sachet containing suspected shabu, which
JESUS CHRIST, "NEW
Ramil handed to PO2 Burgos.
JERUSALEM" AND ALL PERSONS
CLAIMING RIGHTS UNDER HER, With the sale consummated, PO2 Burgos threw his cigarette as pre-arranged signal
Respondents. for the rest of the buy-bust team. He then introduced himself as a police officer and
arrested appellants with the aid of his back-up, PO3 Plopinio and PO3 Sarino. Four (4)
G.R. No. 223321, April 02, more plastic sachets of shabu placed inside a plastic canister were recovered from
2018 - ROGELIO M. FLORETE, Malou. Alvin tried to run towards their nearby house but he was chased by PO3
SR., THE ESTATE OF THE LATE Plopinio. On the same day, the five plastic sachets containing white crystalline
TERESITA F. MENCHAVEZ, substance seized from appellants were submitted for chemical analysis to the PNP
REPRESENTED BY MARY ANN Crime Laboratory and the results confirmed the presence of methylamphetamine-
THERESE F. MENCHAVEZ, ROSIE hydrochloride or shabu, a dangerous drug. The shabu contained in one plastic sachet
JILL F. MENCHAVEZ, MA. weighing 0.01 gram, marked "RB" sold by appellants to PO2 Burgos was duly
ROSARIO F. MENCHAVEZ, identified and presented as evidence in court. The other four (4) plastic sachets
CRISTINE JOY F. MENCHAVEZ, containing shabu, which were seized from Malou on the same occasion marked as
AND EPHRAIM MENCHAVEZ, AND "RB-1", "RB-2", "RB-3"and "RB-4", were likewise presented as evidence.
DIANE GRACE F. MENCHAVEZ,
Petitioners, v. MARCELINO M. For illegal possession of a dangerous drug, like shabu, the elements are: (a) the
FLORETE, JR. AND MA. ELENA F. accused is in possession of an item or object that is identified to be a prohibited or
MUYCO, Respondents dangerous drug; (b) such possession is not authorized by law; and (c) the accused
freely and consciously possessed the drug.13

G.R. No. 233325, April 16,
We have held that the confiscation of additional quantity of illegal drugs, other than
those subject of the consummated sale, from the person of the accused during the
buy-bust, was legally authorized after said accused had been lawfully arrested for
PASTORLITO V. DELA VICTORIA,
committing drug pushing.14
Accused-Appellant.
Nonetheless, the Court has ruled that even when the illegal sale of a dangerous drug
G.R. No. 218584, April 25, was proven by the prosecution, the latter is still burdened to prove the integrity of
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE the corpus delicti. Thus, even if there was a sale, the corpus delicti is not proven if
the chain of custody was defective.15 The corpus delicti is the body of the crime that
DENNIS MANALIGOD Y SANTOS,
would establish that a crime was committed. In cases involving the sale of drugs, the
Accused-Appellant.
corpus delicti is the confiscated illicit drug itself, the integrity of which must be
preserved.16
G.R. No. 234048, April 23,
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE Proof beyond reasonable doubt demands that unwavering exactitude be observed in
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. establishing the corpus delicti: every fact necessary to constitute the crime must be
MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, established. The chain of custody requirement performs this function in buy-bust
ALVIN ALVAREZ Y LONQUIAS AND operations as it ensures that doubts concerning the identity of the evidence are
RAMIL DAL Y MOLIANEDA, removed. In a long line of cases, we have considered it fatal for the prosecution to
Accused-Appellants. fail to prove that the specimen submitted for laboratory examination was the same
one allegedly seized from the accused.17

G.R. No. 219113, April 25,
The preservation of the chain of custody is therefore essential in a successful
prosecution for the illegal sale of dangerous drug. The adoption of a special rule in
ROLAND MIRAÑA Y ALCARAZ, the handling of the dangerous drugs in particular is necessitated by the nature of the
dangerous drug itself which is likely to be tampered, altered, contaminated, or
Accused-Appellant.
substituted.18
G.R. No. 202217, April 25,

Section 1(b) of Dangerous Drug Board (DDB) Regulation No. 1, Series of 2002,19
2018 - PABLO C. HIDALGO,
defines chain of custody as follows:
Petitioner, v. SONIA VELASCO,
Respondent. b. "Chain of Custody" means the duly recorded authorized movements
and custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of
G.R. No. 199161, April 18, dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from the time of
2018 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to
BANK, Petitioner, v. JAMES T. presentation in court for destruction. Such record of movements and
CUA, Respondent. custody of seized item shall include the identity and signature of the
person who held temporary custody of the seized item, the date and time
G.R. No. 197645, April 18, when such transfer of custody were made in the course of safekeeping
2018 - CARLOS JAY ADLAWAN, and used in court as evidence, and the final disposition[.]
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
The apprehending team is required to "document the chain of custody each time a
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
specimen is handled, transferred or presented in court until its disposal, and every
individual in the chain of custody shall be identified following the laboratory control
G.R. No. 231053, April 04,
2018 - DESIDERIO DALISAY and chain of custody form."20
INVESTMENTS, INC., Petitioner, v.

Section 21, paragraph 1 of R.A. No. 9165 provides for the custody and disposition of
SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM,
confiscated, seized, and/or surrendered drugs and/or drug paraphernalia. Said
Respondent.
provision has been amended by R.A. No. 10640.21 Since the alleged offense was
committed on January 26, 2011, the old law and its corresponding implementing
G.R. No. 192797, April 18,
rules and regulations shall be applied, being more favorable to the appellants. The
2018 - EXCELLENT ESSENTIALS
original Section 21 reads as follows:
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,
Petitioner, v. EXTRA EXCEL SEC. 21. Custody and Disposition of Confiscated, Seized, and/or
INTERNATIONAL PHILIPPINES, Surrendered Dangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs,
INC., Respondent. Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals, Instruments/
Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment. - The PDEA shall take charge
G.R. No. 218108, April 11, and have custody of all dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE drugs controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well as
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment so confiscated,
RODOLFO ADVINCULA Y seized and/or surrendered, for proper disposition in the following manner:
MONDANO, Accused-Appellant.
(1) The apprehending team having initial custody and control of the drugs
shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory
G.R. No. 195814, April 04,
and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the
2018 - EVERSLEY CHILDS
person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or seized,
SANITARIUM, REPRESENTED BY
or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from the
DR. GERARDO M. AQUINO, JR.
media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected
(NOW DR. PRIMO JOEL S. ALVEZ)
public official who shall be required to sign the copies of the
CHIEF OF SANITARIUM,
inventory and be given a copy thereof[.] (emphasis supplied)
Petitioner, v. SPOUSES
ANASTACIO AND PERLA
This is implemented by Section 21(a), Article II of the Implementing Rules and
BARBARONA, Respondents.
Regulations (IRR) of R.A. No. 9165, which reads:
G.R. No. 212785, April 04, (a) The apprehending officer/team having initial custody and control of
2018 - REPUBLIC OF THE the drugs shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically
inventory and photograph the same in the presence of the accused or
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. GO the person/s from whom such items were confiscated and/or
PEI HUNG, Respondent. seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from
the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected
G.R. No. 199513, April 18, public official who shall be required to sign the copies of the
2018 - TERESA GUTIERREZ inventory and be given a copy thereof: Provided, that the physical
YAMAUCHI, Petitioner, v. ROMEO inventory and photograph shall be conducted at the place where the
F. SUÑIGA, Respondent. search warrant is served; or at the nearest police station or at the nearest
office of the apprehending officer/team, whichever is practicable, in case
G.R. No. 226727, April 25, of warrantless seizures; Provided, further that non-compliance with
2018 - UNIVERSITY OF THE EAST these requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the
AND DR. ESTER GARCIA, integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items are properly
Petitioners, v. VERONICA M. preserved by the apprehending officer/team, shall not render void
MASANGKAY AND GERTRUDO R. and invalid such seizures of and custody over said items. (emphasis
REGONDOLA, Respondents. supplied)
In this case, after the plastic sachets containing white crystalline substance were
G.R. No. 209031, April 16,
seized by the arresting officers, they were marked by PO2 Burgos with his initials and
2018 - ABIGAEL AN ESPINA-DAN,
brought to the nearby house of Malou. It is there where an inventory of the seized
Petitioner, v. MARCO DAN,
items was done in the presence of appellants and Kgd. Azarcon, as shown in the
Respondent.
pictures taken by PO2 Julaton.22 However, only a barangay kagawad was present
during the inventory and photographing of the seized items.
G.R. No. 214367, April 04,
2018 - REPUBLIC OF THE
Section 1(A.1.6) of the Chain of Custody Implementing Rules and Regulations states
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v.
that "[a] representative of the [National Prosecution Service] is anyone from its
LAUREANA MALIJAN-JAVIER AND
employees, while the media representative is any media practitioner. The elected
IDEN MALIJAN-JAVIER,
public official is any incumbent public official regardless of the place where he/she is
Respondents. elected." The presence of these three (3) persons required by law can be ensured in
a planned operation such as a buy-bust operation.23

G.R. No. 220146, April 18,
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE Here, the buy-bust operation was arranged and scheduled in advance. The police
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. officers formed an apprehending team, coordinated with the Philippine Drug
GLEN ABINA Y LATORRE AND Enforcement Agency (PDEA), prepared the buy-bust money, and held a briefing. Yet,
JESUS LATORRE Y DERAYA, they failed to ensure that a DOJ representative and a media practitioner, would
Accused-Appellants. witness the inventory and photographing of the seized drugs.
Securing the presence of these persons is not impossible. Indeed, it is not enough for
G.R. No. 202784, April 18,
the apprehending officers to merely mark the seized pack of shabu; the buy-bust
2018 - JONNEL D. ESPALDON,
team must also conduct a physical inventory and take photographs of the confiscated
Petitioner, v. RICHARD E. BUBAN
item in the presence of these persons required by law.24 Relevantly, under the
IN HIS CAPACITY AS GRAFT
INVESTIGATION AND Revised PNP Manual on Anti-Illegal Drugs Operations and Investigation,25 on specific
PROSECUTION OFFICER II, rules and procedures for planned operations such as a buy-bust operation, the
MEDWIN S. DIZON IN HIS designated Team Leader is required "to see to it that he has the contact numbers of
CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR, PIAB-A, representatives from the DOJ, Media and any Local Elected Official in the area for
ALEU A. AMANTE IN HIS inventory purposes as required under Section 21, Article II of R.A. No. 9165."26
CAPACITY AS ASSISTANT
The OSG suggests that the absence of the DOJ and media representative may be
OMBUDSMAN, PAMO I, AND
overlooked, explaining that "this predicament is obviously beyond the control of the
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES IN
arresting team who had no choice but to proceed with the tasks at hand."
HER CAPACITY AS OMBUDSMAN
OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE The Court cannot agree to such proposition.
PHILIPPINES, PETER L. CALIMAG,
ASSISTANT SECRETARY, In the recent case of People v. Macud,27 we stressed the importance of this
REVENUE AFFAIRS AND LEGAL requirement, thus:

AFFAIRS GROUP, DEPARTMENT
We cannot even declare that there was substantial compliance with the
OF FINANCE, RENATO M. GARBO
law in this case as the police officers invited no other person to witness
III, MA. LETICIA MALMALATEO,
the procedures that were done after the buy-bust operation, i.e., the
MARLON K. TAULI, FRAYN M.
marking, inventory, and photography of the seized drugs. There was no
BANAWA, AND JOHNNY CAGUIAT,
representative of the media or the DOJ and no allegation that these
ALL NBI AGENTS, NATIONAL
people could similarly compromise the operation if they had been
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
informed of and present before, during, and after the operation.
ROGELIO M. SABADO, AND The presence of the persons who should witness the post-
PRUDENCIO S. DAR, JR., operation procedures is necessary to insulate the apprehension
RAILWAY POLICE, PHILIPPINE and incrimination proceedings from any taint of illegitimacy or
NATIONAL RAILWAYS, ANTONIO irregularity. The insulating presence of such witnesses would have
MARIANO ALMEDA, IRENEO C. preserved an unbroken chain of custody. We have noted in several
QUIZON, ARIEL SARMIENTO, cases that a buy-bust operation is susceptible to abuse, and the only way
DOMINGO BEGUERAS, JOHN to prevent this is to ensure that the procedural safeguards provided by
DOES/JANE DOES, NBI AND/OR the law are strictly observed. In the present case, not only have the
PNR, Respondents. prescribed procedures not been followed, but also (and more importantly)
the lapses not justifiably explained. In People v. Dela Cruz where there
G.R. No. 216065, April 18, was a similar failure to comply with Section 21 of RA No. 9165, the Court
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE declared:
"xxx This inexcusable non-compliance effectively
REYNANTE MANZANERO Y
invalidates their seizure of and custody over the seized
HABANA A.K.A. "NANTE," MARIO
drugs, thus, compromising the identity and integrity of
TANYAG Y MARASIGAN A.K.A.
the same. We resolve the doubt in the integrity and identity of
"TAGA," ANGELITO EVANGELISTA
the corpus delicti in favor of appellant as every fact necessary
Y AVELINO A.K.A. "LITO,"
to constitute the crime must be established by proof beyond
ARTHUR FAJARDO Y MAMALAYAN,
reasonable doubt. Considering that the prosecution tailed to
MARIO EVANGELISTA A.K.A.
present the required quantum of evidence, appellants acquittal
"TIKYO," PATRICK ALEMANIA
is in order."
A.K.A. "BOBBY PATRICK," TOYING
PENALES A.K.A. "TOYING," A.K.A. As in Dela Cruz, and in view of the foregoing, the Court finds the acquittal
"REY," AND A.K.A. "MARLON," of Macud in order. (emphasis supplied, citations omitted)
ACCUSED, ARTHUR FAJARDO Y
The Court has recognized the saving clause provided in the last paragraph of Section
MAMALAYAN, Accused-Appellant.
21 (a), Article II of the IRR of R.A. No. 9165 such that failure to strictly comply with
the said directive is not necessarily fatal to the prosecution's case. Strict compliance
A.C. No. 11821 (formerly CBD
with the legal prescriptions of R.A. No. 9165 may not always be possible given the
Case No. 15-4477), April 02,
field conditions in which the police officers operate. However, the lapses in procedure
2018 - DARIO TANGCAY,
must be recognized, addressed and explained in terms of their justifiable grounds,
Complainant, v. HONESTO
and the integrity and evidentiary value of the evidence seized must be shown to have
ANCHETA CABARROGUIS,
Respondent. been preserved.28
In People v. Cayas,29 the Court reiterated this rule:

G.R. No. 193572, April 04,
2018 - TSUNEISHI HEAVY While recent jurisprudence has subscribed to the provision in the
INDUSTRIES (CEBU), INC., Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of R.A. 9165 providing that
Petitioner, v. MIS MARITIME non-compliance with the prescribed procedure is not fatal to the
CORPORATION, Respondent. prosecution's case, we find it proper to define and set the parameters on
when strict compliance can be excused.
G.R. No. 199353, April 04,
As a rule, strict compliance with the prescribed procedure is
2018 - LEVISTE MANAGEMENT
required because of the illegal drug's unique characteristic that
SYSTEM, INC., Petitioner, v.
renders it indistinct, not readily identifiable, and easily open to
LEGASPI TOWERS 200, INC., AND
tampering, alteration, or substitution either by accident or
VIVIAN Y. LOCSIN AND PITONG
otherwise.
MARCORDE, RESPONDENTS.
ENGR. NELSON Q. IRASGA, IN The exception found in the IRR of R.A. 9165 comes into play when strict
HIS CAPACITY AS MUNICIPAL compliance with the proscribed procedures is not observed. This saving
BUILDING OFFICIAL OF MAKATI, clause, however, applies only (1) where the prosecution
METRO MANILA AND HON. JOSE recognized the procedural lapses, and thereafter explained the
P. DE JESUS, IN HIS CAPACITY cited justifiable grounds, and (2) when the prosecution
AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPT. OF established that the integrity and evidentiary value of the
PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, evidence seized had been preserved. The prosecution, thus, loses the
THIRD PARTY, Respondents.; G.R. benefit of invoking the presumption of regularity and bears the burden of
NO. 199389, April 04, 2018 - proving — with moral certainty — that the illegal drug presented in court
LEGASPI TOWERS 200, INC., is the same drug that was confiscated from the accused during his arrest.
Petitioner, v. LEVISTE 30 (emphases supplied)
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, INC.,
ENGR. NELSON Q. IRASGA, IN During his cross examination, PO2 Burgos was asked regarding the absence of the
HIS CAPACITY AS MUNICIPAL DOJ and media representative but he failed to give any justifiable reason. The
BLDG. OFFICIAL OF MAKATI, pertinent portions of his testimony are herein reproduced:
METRO MANILA, AND HON. JOSE
xxx xxx xxx
P. DE JESUS, IN HIS CAPACITY
AS SECRETARY OF THE
Q: And you would agree, as stated in Section 21 of RA 9165, the
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
actual inventory must be witnessed by an elected public official?
AND HIGHWAYS, Respondents.
A: Yes, sir.
G.R. No. 185530, April 18,
2018 - MAKATI TUSCANY
CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION,
Q: And in this case, Kgd. Noel Azarcon was present?
Petitioner, v. MULTI-REALTY
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, A: Yes, sir.
Respondent.
G.R. No. 223399, April 23, Q: And aside from that, there must also be a witness coming from the
2018 - FATIMA O. DE GUZMAN- DOJ and media?
FUERTE, MARRIED TO MAURICE
A: Yes, sir.
GEORGE FUERTE, Petitioner, v.
SPOUSES SILVINO S.ESTOMO
AND CONCEPCION C. ESTOMO,
Respondents. Q: In these pictures, can you tell the court if a media man or DOJ
representative was present during the inventory?
G.R. No. 213617, April 18,
A: No representative from the media and DOJ.
2018 - ARCH. EUSEBIO B.
BERNAL, DOING BUSINESS
UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE
Q: What was the reason why there were no representatives from the
CONTEMPORARY BUILDERS,
media and DOJ?
Petitioner, v. DR. VIVENCIO
VILLAFLOR AND DRA. GREGORIA
A: It was our team leader who coordinated with the barangay
VILLAFLOR, Respondents.
and only Kgd. Azarcon together with the two barangay
tanods arrived.
G.R. No. 214803, April 23,
2018 - ALONA G. ROLDAN,
Petitioner, v. SPOUSES CLARENCE
Q: You would admit that your team leader contacted the barangay
I. BARRIOS AND ANNA LEE T.
kagawad together with the barangay tanods during the actual
BARRIOS, ROMMEL MATORRES,
inventory?
AND HON. JEMENA ABELLAR
ARBIS, IN HER CAPACITY AS A: Yes, sir.
PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH 6,
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, AKLAN,
Respondents.
Q: But he did not contact representatives from the DOJ and
media?
G.R. No. 228470, April 23,
2018 - LOADSTAR A: I cannot remember, sir.
INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING, INC.,
Petitioner, v. ERNESTO AWITEN
YAMSON, SUBSTITUTED BY HIS
x x x31 (emphases supplied)
HEIRS GEORGIA M. YAMSON AND
THEIR CHILDREN, NAMELY:
In the recent case of People v. Carlit32 there was a DOJ representative who witnessed
JENNIE ANN MEDINA YAMSON,
the inventory but no media representative and an elected official present. We held
KIMBERLY SHEEN MEDINA
that the prosecution failed to prove every link in the chain of custody:
YAMSON, JOSHUA MEDINA
YAMSON AND ANGEL LOUISE In the case at bar, PO3 Carvajal testified that he marked the alleged
MEDINA YAMSON, Respondents. shabu at the police station, instead of doing so immediately at the place
where the arrest was effected as required by law. Moreover, the arresting
officers failed to strictly observe Section 21 of RA. 9165 that requires that
G.R. No. 201414, April 18, "an elected public official and a representative of the National Prosecution
2018 - PEDRO PEREZ, Petitioner, Service or the media" be present during the inventory, and be given a
v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, copy of the report of the seized items. Such failure of the police
Respondent. officers to secure the presence of a representative from the media
or a barangay official raises serious doubts on whether the chain
G.R. No. 198393, April 04, of custody was actually unbroken.
Notably, PO3 Carvajal did not offer any explanation for these lapses.
Rather, he admitted that they were no longer able to coordinate with the
RODOLFO M. CUENCA,
media and the local official because he was instructed by their team
FERDINAND E. MARCOS, IMELDA
leader to immediately bring Carlit to the police station. To Our mind, this
R. MARCOS, ROBERTO S.
does not constitute justifiable ground for skirting the statutory
CUENCA, MANUEL I. TINIO,
requirements under Section 21 of R.A. 9165. We are therefore constrained
VICTOR AFRICA, MARIO K.
to rule as We did in Bartolini, viz:
ALFELOR, DON M. FERRY AND
OSCAR BELTRAN, Respondents. "The failure to immediately mark the seized items, taken
together with the absence of a representative from the
G.R. No. 208091, April 23, media to witness the inventory, without any justifiable
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE explanation, casts doubt on whether the chain of
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. custody is truly unbroken. Serious uncertainty is created on
BENITO MOLEJON, Accused- the identity of the corpus delicti in view of the broken linkages
Appellant. in the chain of custody. The prosecution has the burden of
proving each link in the chain of custody - from the initial
G.R. No. 211232, April 11, contact between buyer and seller, the offer to purchase the
2018 - COCA-COLA BOTTLERS drug, the payment of the buy-bust money, and the delivery of
PHILS., INC., Petitioner, v. the illegal drug. The prosecution must prove with certainty
SPOUSES EFREN AND LOLITA each link in this chain of custody and each link must be the
SORIANO, Respondents. subject of strict scrutiny by the courts to ensure that law-
abiding citizens are not unlawfully induced to commit an
A.C. No. 9186, April 11, 2018
offense."33 (emphasis supplied)
- ATTY. JUAN PAULO VILLONCO,
Complainant, v. ATTY. ROMEO G. Indeed, the prosecution's unjustified non-compliance with the safeguards of the chain
ROXAS, Respondent. of custody constitutes a fatal procedural flaw that destroys the reliability of the
corpus delicti.34
G.R. No. 226590, April 23,
The CA clearly disregarded the operative phrase—that the prosecution must provide
2018 - SHIRLEY T. LIM, MARY T.
"justifiable grounds" for non-compliance, in addition to showing that the prosecution
LIMLEON AND JIMMY T. LIM,
maintained the integrity of the seized item.35
Petitioners, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
The appellate court further failed to take note of Sections 1(A.1.9) and 1 (A.1.10) of
the Chain of Custody Implementing Rules and Regulations, which provide:36

G.R. No. 206529, April 23,
2018 - RENANTE B.
A.1.9. Noncompliance, [a] under justifiable grounds, with the
REMOTICADO, Petitioner, v.
requirements of Section 21 (1) of RA No. 9165, as amended,
TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION
shall not render void and invalid such seizures and custody
TRADING CORP. AND ROMMEL M.
over the items [b] provided the integrity and the
ALIGNAY, Respondents.
evidentiary value of the seized items are properly
preserved by the apprehending officer/team.
G.R. No. 229047, April 16,
A.1.10. Any justification or explanation in cases of noncompliance
RAMONCITO CORNEL Y
with the requirements of Section 21 (1) of RA No. 9165, as
ASUNCION, Accused-Appellants.
amended, shall be clearly stated in the sworn
statements/affidavits of the apprehending/seizing
G.R. No. 211187, April 16,
officers, as well as the steps taken to preserve the
2018 - SCANMAR MARITIME
integrity and evidentiary value of the
SERVICES, INC. AND CROWN
seized/confiscated items. Certification or record of
SHIPMANAGEMENT, INC.,
coordination for operating units other than the PDEA pursuant
Petitioners, v. CELESTINO M.
to Section 86 (a) and (b), Article IX of the IRR of RA No. 9165
HERNANDEZ, JR., Respondent.
shall be presented. (emphasis supplied)
G.R. No. 216922, April 18, The Implementing Rules and Regulations on the chain of custody thus require that
2018 - JAYLORD DIMAL AND the apprehending officers not simply mention a justifiable ground, but also clearly
ALLAN CASTILLO, Petitioners, v. state this ground in their sworn affidavit, coupled with a statement on the steps they
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, took to preserve the integrity of the seized item.37 In this case, there was no
Respondent. justifiable ground given by the arresting officers for the absence of DOJ and media
representatives in their Pinagsamang Salaysay.38 PO2 Burgos' testimony in court

G.R. No. 230249, April 24, further highlighted the lack of justifiable ground for the buy-bust team's failure to
2018 - ATTY. PABLO B. strictly comply with the requirements of Section 21.
FRANCISCO, Petitioner, v.
The CA likewise erred in simply relying on the prosecution's claim that the integrity of
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
the evidence was preserved in accordance with the chain of custody requirements for
AND ATTY. JOHNIELLE KEITH P.
NIETO, Respondents. proper handling of the drug specimen. In People v. Sanchez,39 the Court said:
For greater specificity, "marking" means the placing by the apprehending

G.R. No. 196020, April 18,
officer or the poseur-buyer of his/her initials and signature on the item/s
2018 - MANILA ELECTRIC
seized. If the physical inventory and photograph are made at the nearest
COMPANY, VICENTE MONTERO,
police station or office as allowed by the rules, the inventory and
MR. BONDOC, AND MR. BAYONA,
photography of the seized items must be made in accordance with Sec. 2
Petitioners, v. NORDEC
of Board Resolution No. 1, Series of 2002 but in every case, the
PHILIPPINES AND/OR MARVEX
apprehended violator or counsel must be present. Again, this is in keeping
INDUSTRIAL CORP.
with the desired level of integrity that the handling process requires.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
Thereafter, the seized items shall be placed in an envelope or an
PRESIDENT, DR. POTENCIANO R.
evidence bag unless the type and quantity of the seized items
MALVAR, Respondents.; G.R. No.
require a different type of handling and/or container. The
196116, April 18, 2018 - NORDEC
evidence bag or container shall accordingly be signed by the
PHILIPPINES REPRESENTED BY
handling officer and turned over to the next officer in the chain of
ITS PRESIDENT, DR.
custody.40 (emphasis supplied)
POTENCIANO R. MALVAR,
Petitioner, v. MANILA ELECTRIC PO2 Burgos had testified that after marking with his own initials the confiscated
COMPANY, VICENTE MONTERO, plastic sachets containing suspected shabu, they conducted the inventory and
MR. BONDOC, AND MR. BAYONA, photographing of the seized items in front of Malou's house. Thereafter, appellants
Respondents. were brought to their station for proper documentation and preparation of request for
the PNP Crime Laboratory. From the crime scene, he, together with appellants,
G.R. No. 191310, April 11, boarded the same car; all this time the seized items were in his possession.41
2018 - PRINCESS TALENT However, no details were provided by PO2 Burgos as to how the seized items were
CENTER PRODUCTION, INC., carried or handled during the transfer to the police station.
AND/OR LUCHI SINGH MOLDES,
Petitioners, v. DESIREE T. While the small transparent plastic canister taken from Malou where the four plastic
MASAGCA, Respondent. sachets of shabu were found has been marked as "RB-5", there was no testimony as
to whether all five sachets of the drug specimen (marked "RB" to "RB-4") seized from
G.R. No. 232131, April 24, her were actually placed inside the said canister and sealed during the transfer to the
2018 - REY NATHANIEL C. police station and submission to the PNP Crime Laboratory. Forensic Chemist P/Chief
IFURUNG, Petitioner, v. HON. Insp. Richard Allan B. Mangalip testified that the small transparent plastic canister
CONCHITA C. CARPIO MORALES marked "RB-5" was received by their office together with the plastic sachets of the
IN HER CAPACITY AS THE drug specimen, but when asked what the said canister contained, he answered
OMBUDSMAN, HON. MELCHOR none.42 Describing the condition of the items submitted to him by their Desk Officer
ARTHUR H. CARANDANG, HON. NUP Arthur Relos, PCI Mangalip stated that the Request for Laboratory Examination
GERARD ABETO MOSQUERA, "described the specimen subject for examination and the Letter Request there was
HON. PAUL ELMER M. CLEMENTE, also an attached specimen."43 This confirms that the five plastic sachets of the drug
HON. RODOLFO M. ELMAN, HON. specimen were not sealed and placed inside the transparent plastic canister when it
CYRIL ENGUERRA RAMOS IN was transported to the police station and submitted to the crime laboratory, as
THEIR CAPACITIES AS DEPUTIES similarly reflected in the Physical Science Report No. D-047-119 describing the items
OMBUDSMAN, AND THE OFFICE
submitted by apprehending team.44
OF THE OMBUDSMAN,
Respondents. The above lapses cast doubt on the prosecution's claim of an unbroken chain of
custody. Despite the submission of a duly accomplished Chain of Custody Form,45 the
G.R. No. 223660, April 02, prosecution failed to establish that the plastic sachets containing shabu were properly
2018 - LOURDES VALDERAMA,
Petitioner, v. SONIA ARGUELLES handled and sealed in a container or evidence bag during the transfer to the police
AND LORNA ARGUELLES, station and until their submission to the crime laboratory.
Respondents.
The prosecution cannot rely on the presumption of regularity in the performance of
official functions and weakness of the defense's evidence to bolster its case. Any
G.R. No. 219953, April 23,
doubt on the conduct of the police operations cannot be resolved in the prosecution's
favor by relying on the presumption of regularity in the performance of official
functions. The failure to observe the proper procedure negates the operation of the
ANGELITA REYES Y GINOVE AND
regularity accorded to police officers. Moreover, to allow the presumption to prevail
JOSEPHINE SANTA MARIA Y
notwithstanding clear lapses on the part of the police is to negate the safeguards
SANCHEZ, Accused-Appellants.
precisely placed by the law to ensure that no abuse is committed.46
G.R. Nos. 232197-98, April 16,

Under the current Section 21, non-compliance with the requirements shall not render
void and invalid such seizures and custody over the seized items as long as the
integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the
HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN
apprehending officer/team. It must be stressed, however, that the non-compliance
(FOURTH DIVISION), ALEJANDRO
must be for "justifiable grounds." In this case, the arresting officers failed to convince
E. GAMOS, AND ROSALYN G.
the Court that they had justifiable reasons not to strictly comply with the provisions
GILE, Respondents.
of the law requiring the presence of an elected official, DOJ and media
representatives during the physical inventory and photographing of the seized shabu.
G.R. No. 214759, April 04,
Also fatal to the prosecution's case is the absence of testimony on how the plastic
sachets containing white crystalline substance suspected to be shabu were handled
from the time of arrest/seizure until their submission to the crime laboratory and to
DINA CALATES Y DELA CRUZ,
ensure that their evidentiary value is not compromised.
Accused-Appellants.
We have held that the buy-bust team "should have been more meticulous in
G.R. No. 194765, April 23, complying with Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 to preserve the integrity of the
2018 - MARSMAN & COMPANY, seized shabu," most especially where the weight of the seized item is a miniscule
INC., Petitioner, v. RODIL C. STA. amount that can be easily planted and tampered with.47 "Law enforcers should not
RITA, Respondent. trifle with the legal requirement to ensure integrity m the chain of custody of seized
dangerous drugs and drug paraphernalia. This is especially true when only a
A.M. No. MTJ-15-1860 miniscule amount of dangerous drugs is alleged to have been taken from the
(Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 09- accused."48
2224-MTJ), April 03, 2018 -
ROSILANDA M. KEUPPERS, As a final word, the Court reiterates its ruling in People v. Holgado, et al.:49
Complainant, v. JUDGE VIRGILIO

It is lamentable that while our dockets are clogged with prosecutions
G. MURCIA, MUNICIPAL TRIAL
under Republic Act No. 9165 involving small-time drug users and retailers,
COURT IN CITIES, BRANCH 2,
we are seriously short of prosecutions involving the proverbial "big fish."
ISLAND GARDEN CITY OF SAMAL,
We are swamped with cases involving small fry who have been arrested
Respondent.
for miniscule amounts. While they are certainly a bane to our society,
small retailers are but low-lying fruits in an exceedingly vast network of
IPI No. 17-267-CA-J, April 24,
drug cartels. Both law enforcers and prosecutors should realize that the
2018 - RE: VERIFIED COMPLAINT
more effective and efficient strategy is to focus resources more on the
OF FERNANDO CASTILLO
source and true leadership of these nefarious organizations. Otherwise, all
AGAINST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE
these executive and judicial resources expended to attempt to convict an
MARIFLOR PUNZALAN-CASTILLO,
accused for 0.05 gram of shabu under doubtful custodial arrangements
COURT OF APPEALS, MANILA.
will hardly make a dent in the overall picture. It might in fact be
distracting our law enforcers from their more challenging task: to uproot
G.R. No. 210518, April 18,
the causes of this drug menace. We stand ready to assess cases involving
greater amounts of drugs and the leadership of these cartels.50
MARTIN NIKOLAI Z. JAVIER AND WHEREFORE, the appeal is GRANTED. The Decision dated May 19, 2017 of the
MICHELLE K. MERCADO-JAVIER, Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 07568 is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE for
Respondents. failure of the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of accused-
appellants Malou F. Alvarado, Alvin L. Alvarez and Ramil M. Dal. They are accordingly
G.R. No. 210580, April 18, ACQUITTED of the crime(s) charged against them and ordered immediately
2018 - REPUBLIC OF THE RELEASED from custody, unless they are being held for some other lawful cause.
The Director of the Bureau of Corrections is ORDERED to implement this decision
and to inform this Court of the date of the actual release from confinement of the
LUDYSON C. CATUBAG, accused-appellants within five (5) days from receipt hereof.
Respondent.
SO ORDERED.
G.R. Nos. 201225-26 (From Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Bersamin, Leonen, and Martires, JJ., concur.
CTA-EB Nos. 649 & 651), April
18, 2018 - TEAM SUAL
CORPORATION (FORMERLY
MIRANT SUAL CORPORATION),
May 23, 2018
Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF
INTERNAL REVENUE,
Respondent.; G.R. No. 201132 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT
(From CTA-EB No. 651), April 18,
Sirs/Mesdames:
2018; COMMISSIONER OF
INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. Please take notice that on April 23, 2018 a Decision, copy attached hereto, was
TEAM SUAL CORPORATION rendered by the Supreme Court in the above-entitled case, the original of which was
(FORMERLY MIRANT SUAL received by this Office on May 23, 2018 at 10:58 a.m.
CORPORATION), Respondent.;
G.R. No. 201133 (From CTA-EB
No. 649), April 18, 2018; Very truly yours,
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITAN
REVENUE, Petitioner, v. TEAM
Division Clerk of Court
SUAL CORPORATION (FORMERLY
MIRANT SUAL CORPORATION),
Respondent.
G.R. No. 197930, April 17,

2018 - EFRAIM C. GENUINO,
ORDER OF RELEASE
ERWIN F. GENUINO AND SHERYL
G. SEE, Petitioners, v. HON. LEILA
M. DE LIMA, IN HER CAPACITY AS
SECRETARY OF JUSTICE, AND TO: Director General Ronald Dela Rosa
RICARDO V. PARAS III, IN HIS BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS
CAPACITY AS CHIEF STATE 1770 Muntinlupa City
COUNSEL, CRISTINO L. NAGUIAT,
JR. AND THE BUREAU OF
IMMIGRATION, Respondents.; GREETINGS:
G.R. No. 199034, April 17, 2018 -
WHEREAS, the Supreme Court on April 23, 2018 promulgated a Decision in the
MA. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-
above-entitled case, the dispositive portion of which reads:
ARROYO, Petitioner, v. HON.
LEILA M. DE LIMA, AS "WHEREFORE, the appeal is GRANTED. The Decision dated May 19,
SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 07568 is hereby
OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A. REVERSED and SET ASIDE for failure of the prosecution to prove beyond
DAVID, JR., AS COMMISSIONER reasonable doubt the guilt of accused-appellants Malou F. Alvarado, Alvin
OF THE BUREAU OF L. Alvarez and Ramil M. Dal. They are accordingly ACQUITTED of the
IMMIGRATION, Respondents.; crime(s) charged against them and ordered immediately RELEASED from
G.R. No. 199046, April 17, 2018 - custody, unless they are being held for some other lawful cause.
JOSE MIGUEL T. ARROYO,
The Director of the Bureau of Corrections is ORDERED to implement this
Petitioner, v. HON. LEILA M. DE
decision and to inform this Court of the date of the actual release from
LIMA, AS SECRETARY OF THE
confinement of the accused-appellants within five (5) days from receipt
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND
hereof.
RICARDO V. PARAS III, AS CHIEF
STATE COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT
SO ORDERED."
OF JUSTICE AND RICARDO A.
DAVID, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS NOW, THEREFORE, You are hereby ordered to immediately release MALOU F.
COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF ALVARADO, ALVIN L. ALVAREZ AND RAMIL M. DAL unless there are other lawful
IMMIGRATION, Respondents. causes for which they should be further detained, and to return this Order with the
certificate of your proceedings within five (5) days from notice hereof.
G.R. No. 210475, April 11, GIVEN by the Honorable PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR., Chairperson of the Third
2018 - RAMON K. ILUSORIO, MA. Division of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, this 23rd day of April 2018.
LOURDES C. CRISTOBAL, ROMEO
G. RODRIGUEZ, EDUARDO C.
Very truly yours,
ROJAS, CESAR B. CRISOL,
VIOLETA J. JOSEF, ERLINDA K. (SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITAN
ILUSORIO, SHEREEN K. Division Clerk of Court
ILUSORIO, AND CECILIA A.
BISUÑA, Petitioners, v. SYLVIA K.
ILUSORIO, Respondent.
Endnotes:
G.R. No. 232247, April 23,

2018 - PEOPLE OF THE 1Rollo, pp. 2-15; penned by Associate Justice Leoncia Real-Dimagiba and
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. concurred in by Associate Justices Ramon R. Garcia and Renato C.
RONILLO LOPEZ, JR. Y Francisco.
MANTALABA @ "DODONG",
2 CA rollo, pp. 54-65; penned by Judge Danilo V. Suarez.
Accused-Appellant.
3 Records, p. 2.
G.R. No. 226481, April 18,
2018 - PEOPLE OF THE 4 Id. at 3.
5Rollo, pp. 4-6.
JAYCENT MOLA Y SELBOSA A.K.A.
"OTOK", Accused-Appellant.
6 Id. at 6-8; CA rollo, pp. 97-99.
G.R. No. 222861, April 23, 7 CA rollo, pp. 64-65.

2018 - PO2 JESSIE FLORES Y DE
LEON, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF 8 726 Phil. 389 (2014).
THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
9Rollo, pp. 24-25.
G.R. No. 214886, April 04,

10 CA rollo, pp. 44-50.
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. 11 Id. at 79-84.
BERNIE CONCEPCION, Accused-
Appellant. 12People v. Bautista, 682 Phil. 487, 497-498 (2012), citing People v.
Naquita, 582 Phil. 422, (2008); People v. Del Monte, 575 Phil. 576, 587
G.R. No. 195320, April 23, (2008); and People v. Santiago, 564 Phil. 181, 193 (2007).
2018 - BUREAU OF INTERNAL
13People v. Bautista, supra at 498.
REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY THE
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL 14 Id.
REVENUE, Petitioner, v. HON.
ERNESTO D. ACOSTA, ET AL. OF 15 See People v. Saragena, G.R. No. 210677, August 23, 2017,
THE SPECIAL FIRST DIVISION OF
16People v. Saragena, supra; citing People v. Pagaduan, 641 Phil. 432,
THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS AND
CHEVRON PHILIPPINES, INC. 447 (2010); People v. Caiz, 790 Phil. 183, 196 (2016).
(FORMERLY CALTEX PHILIPPINES,
17People v. Sanchez, 590 Phil. 214, 235 (2008).
INC.), Respondents.
18People v. Macud, G.R. No. 219175, December 14, 2017, citing Malillin v.
G.R. No. 195962, April 18,
People, 576 Phil. 576 (2008).
2018 - PRESIDENTIAL
COMMISSION ON GOOD 19 Guidelines on the Custody and Disposition of Seized Dangerous Drugs,
GOVERNMENT, Petitioner, v. Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals, and Laboratory Equipment.
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN,
20 Guidelines on the Implementing Rules and Regulation (IRR) of Section
PLACIDO L. MAPA, JR., RECIO M.
GARCIA, LEON O. TY, JOSE R. 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 as Amended by Republic Act No. 10640, Sec.
TENGCO, JR., ALEJANDRO 1.B.5.
MELCHOR, VICENTE PATERNO,

21 "An Act to Further Strengthen the Anti-Drug Campaign of the
RUBEN ANCHETA, RAFAEL SISON,
Government, Amending for the Purpose Section 21 of Republic Act No.
HILARION M. HENARES, JR.,
CARMELINO G. ALVENDIA AND 9165, Otherwise Known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
GENEROSO F. TENSECO, 2002". Approved on July 14, 2014.
Respondents.
22 Exhs. H, I, P, Q, R, and S; records, pp. 359, 363-364.
G.R. No. 230473, April 23, 23People v. Saragena, supra note 15.
2018 - SEACREST MARITIME
MANAGEMENT, INC. AND/OR 24 Id.; citing Lescano v. People, 778 Phil. 460, 469 (2016).
HERNING SHIPPING ASIA PTE.
25 Dated September 2014, incorporating the amendments introduced by
LTD., Petitioners, v. ALMA Q.
RODEROS, AS WIDOW AND RA 10640.
LEGAL HEIR OF FRANCISCO

26 Chapter 3, Sec. 3.1 (a)(2)(7).
RODEROS, Respondent.
27 Supra note 18.

A.M. No. P-18-3833 (Formerly
OCA IPI No. 14-4370-P), April 16, 28People v. Martinez, 652 Phil. 347, 382 (2010), citing People v.
2018 - JULIUS E. PADUGA, Cervantes, 600 Phil. 819, 843 (2009).
Complainant, v. ROBERTO
29 789 Phil. 70 (2009).
"BOBBY" R. DIMSON, SHERIFF IV,
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF
30 Id. at 79-80.
VALENZUELA CITY, BRANCH 171,
Respondent. 31 TSN, August 14, 2014, pp. 18-19; records, pp. 317-318.
32 G.R. No. 227309, August 16, 2017.

G.R. No. 226656, April 23,
2018 - ARNEL T. GERE, Petitioner,
33 Id.
v. ANGLO-EASTERN CREW
MANAGEMENT PHILS., INC. 34Dela Riva v. People, 769 Phil. 872, 894 (2015).
AND/OR ANGLO-EASTERN CREW
MANAGEMENT (ASIA), LTD., 35 Supra note 15.
Respondents.; G.R. No. 226713,
36 Id.
April 23, 2018 - ANGLO-EASTERN
CREW MANAGEMENT PHILS., INC.
37 Guidelines on the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of Section
AND/OR ANGLO-EASTERN CREW
21 of Republic Act No. 9165 as Amended by Republic Act No. 10640, Sec.
MANAGEMENT (ASIA), LTD.,
1.A.1.10.
Petitioners, v. ARNEL T. GERE,
Respondent. 38 Exh. "D"; records, pp, 353-355.
39 Supra note 17.

G.R. No. 213994, April 18,
2018 - MARGIE SANTOS MITRA,
40 Id. at 241-242.
Petitioner, v. PERPETUA L.
SABLAN-GUEVARRA, REMEGIO L. 41 TSN, August 14, 2014, pp. 9-10; records, pp. 308-309.
SABLAN, ET AL., Respondents.
42 TSN, March 9, 2012, p. 13; records, p. 76.
G.R. No. 200256, April 11,
43 Id. at 5; records, p. 68.
44 Records, p. 352.
NORTHERN CEMENT
CORPORATION, Respondent. 45 Exh. "O"; records, p. 362.
G.R. No. 193499, April 23, 46People v. Macud, supra note 18, citing People v. Dela Cruz, 589 Phil.
2018 - BANCO DE ORO UNIBANK, 259, 272 (2008).
INC., Petitioner, v. VTL REALTY,
47People v. Saragena, supra note 15; citing People v. Casacop, 155 Phil.
INC., Respondent.
265 (2015).
G.R. No. 222070, April 16, 48People v. Dela Cruz, 744 Phil. 816, 820 (2014).
2018 - EMMANUEL M. LU,
ROMMEL M. LU, CARMELA M. LU, 49 741 Phil. 78 (2014).
KAREN GRACE P. LU AND JAMES
50 Id. at 100.
MICHAEL LU, Petitioners, v.
MARISSA LU CHIONG AND

CRISTINA LU NG, Respondents.
A.M. No. 17-12-135-MeTC,

Back to Home | Back to Main
April 16, 2018 - RE: DROPPING
FROM THE ROLLS OF MR. ARNO
D. DEL ROSARIO, COURT
STENOGRAPHER II, BRANCH 41,
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
(METC), QUEZON CITY.
G.R. No. 228890, April 18,

BASHER TOMAWIS Y ALI,
Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 227982, April 23,

2018 - MARIO DIESTA BAJARO,
Petitioner, v. METRO STONERICH
CORP., AND/OR IBRAHIM M.
NUÑO, Respondents.
G.R. No. 171101, April 24,

2018 - HACIENDA LUISITA
INCORPORATED, PETITIONER,
LUISITA INDUSTRIAL PARK
CORPORATION AND RIZAL
COMMERCIAL BANKING
CORPORATION, Petitioners-in-
Intervention, v. PRESIDENTIAL
AGRARIAN REFORM COUNCIL;
SECRETARY NASSER
PANGANDAMAN OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN
REFORM; ALYANSA NG MGA
MANGGAGAWANG BUKID NG
HACIENDA LUISITA, RENE
GALANG, NOEL MALLARI, AND
JULIO SUNIGA AND HIS
SUPERVISORY GROUP OF THE
HACIENDA LUISITA, INC. AND
WINDSOR ANDAYA, Respondents.
Copyright © 1995 - 2021 REDiaz

Apartment and Condo Rentals: Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Apartment and Condo Rentals: Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

4/27/2021 G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.

lee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y FLORES, ALVIN ALVAR…

apartment and condo rentals

Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence

April 2018 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme Court

ChanRobles On-Line Bar

G.R. No. 234048, April 23, 2018

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MALOU ALVARADO Y

Trial Court (RTC) of Parañaque City, finding accused-appellant Malou F. Alvarado

Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride, a dangerous drug.4

In another Information, docketed as Criminal Case No. 11-0123, Beata E. Lonquias

When arraigned, appellants pleaded not guilty. Trial ensued.

Version of the Prosecution

The prosecution presented Forensic Chemist Police Inspector Richard

On 26 January 2011, around 2:00 o'clock in the afternoon, an Informant

Lonquias alias Betty were found negative of shabu.5

Version of the Accused

The specimens consisting of five (5) sachets of shabu marked "RB" to

CARILLO, DR. CYNTHIA LOZA, FR.

G.R. No. 232892, April 04,

freely and consciously possessed the drug.13

one allegedly seized from the accused.17

G.R. No. 202217, April 25,

INVESTMENTS, INC., Petitioner, v.

a planned operation such as a buy-bust operation.23

REVENUE AFFAIRS AND LEGAL requirement, thus:

In People v. Cayas,29 the Court reiterated this rule:

the Chain of Custody Implementing Rules and Regulations, which provide:36

representatives in their Pinagsamang Salaysay.38 PO2 Burgos' testimony in court

For greater specificity, "marking" means the placing by the apprehending

G.R. Nos. 232197-98, April 16,

Complainant, v. JUDGE VIRGILIO

G.R. No. 197930, April 17,

G.R. No. 232247, April 23,

G.R. No. 222861, April 23, 7 CA rollo, pp. 64-65.

G.R. No. 214886, April 04,

TENGCO, JR., ALEJANDRO 1.B.5.

MELCHOR, VICENTE PATERNO,

LEGAL HEIR OF FRANCISCO

27 Supra note 18.

32 G.R. No. 227309, August 16, 2017.

39 Supra note 17.

MARISSA LU CHIONG AND

A.M. No. 17-12-135-MeTC,

G.R. No. 228890, April 18,

G.R. No. 227982, April 23,

G.R. No. 171101, April 24,

Copyright © 1995 - 2021 REDiaz

You might also like